Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
January 17, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Draw Your Weapon!

Truthdig Bazaar
Pinochet and Me

Pinochet and Me

By Marc Cooper

more items

Email this item Print this item

Why They Hate Warren Buffett

Posted on Sep 28, 2011
White House / Pete Souza

President Obama meets with Warren Buffett, the chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, in the Oval Office.

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

Maybe only a really, really rich guy can credibly make the case for why the wealthy should be asked to pay more in taxes. You can’t accuse a big capitalist of “class warfare.” That’s why the right wing despises Warren Buffett and is trying so hard to shut him up.

Militant conservatives are effective because they are absolutely shameless. Many of the same people who think the rich should be free to spend unlimited sums influencing our politics without having to disclose anything are now asking Buffett to make his tax returns public. I guess if you’re indifferent to consistency, you have a lot of freedom of action.

Buffett has outraged conservatives by saying that he pays taxes at a lower rate than his secretary. He’s said this for years, but he’s a target now because President Obama is using his comment to make the case for higher taxes on millionaires.

Thus did The Wall Street Journal editorial page call on Buffett to “let everyone else in on his secrets of tax avoidance by releasing his tax returns.”

Somehow, the Journal did not think to ask its friends who battle vigorously for low taxes on capital gains to release their tax returns, too. But aren’t they just as engaged in this argument as Buffett is? Shouldn’t accountability go both ways? Nor, by the way, did the Journal suggest that the Koch brothers could serve the public interest by releasing a full accounting of all their political spending.

Buffett’s sin is that he spoke a truth that conservatives want to keep covered up: Taxing capital gains at 15 percent means that people who make their money from investments pay taxes at a much lower marginal rate than those who earn more than $34,500 a year from their labor. That’s when the income tax rate goes up to 25 percent. (For joint filers, the 25 percent rate kicks in at $69,000.) For singles, the 28 percent bracket starts at $83,600, the 33 percent bracket at $174,400.

So if an investor such as Buffett pockets, say, $100 million of his income in capital gains, he pays only a 15 percent tax on all that money. For everyday working people, the 15 percent rate applies only to earnings between $8,500 and $34,500. After that, they’re paying a higher marginal rate than the multimillionaire pays on gains from investments. Oh, yes, and before Obama temporarily cut it by 2 points, the payroll tax added another 6.2 percent to the burden on middle-class workers. That levy doesn’t apply to capital gains, or to income above $106,800, so it hits low- and middle-income workers much harder than the wealthy.

No wonder partisans of low taxes on wealthy investors hate Warren Buffett. He has forced a national conversation on (1) the bias of the tax system against labor; (2) the fact that in comparison to middle- or upper-middle class people, the really wealthy pay a remarkably low percentage of their income in taxes; and (3) the deeply regressive nature of the payroll tax.

And it’s worth noticing that while conservatives who talk about religion get a lot of coverage—and I will always defend their freedom to speak of faith in the public square—what really get the juices flowing on the right these days are tax rates. I’m not sure that a politician who renounced the Almighty would get nearly the attention Buffett has received for his renunciation of low capital gains taxes.

Advocates of higher taxes on the wealthy do not want to “punish” the successful. Buffett and Doug Edwards, a millionaire who asked Obama at a recent town hall event in California to raise his taxes, are saying that none of us succeeds solely because of personal effort. We are all lucky to have been born in—or, for immigrants, been admitted to—a country where the rule of law is strong, where property is safe, where a vast infrastructure has been built over generations, where our colleges and universities are the envy of the world, and where government protects our liberties.

Wealthy people, by definition, have done better out of this system than other people have. They ought to be willing to join Buffett and Edwards in arguing that for this reason alone, it is common sense, not class jealousy, to ask the most fortunate to pay taxes at higher tax rates than other people do. It is for this heresy that Buffett is being harassed.

E.J. Dionne’s email address is ejdionne(at)
© 2011, Washington Post Writers Group


Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By rpafitzpatrick, May 14, 2012 at 2:13 pm Link to this comment

E.J. Dionne, Jr.‘s final two paragraphs are an ingenious contribution to the taxation
debate. It draws to mind the substance of Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers.

If one understands society as a shared system of personal resources then Karl
Marx’s dictum ‘from each according to their means to each according to their
need’ makes sense. Of course, it must be ensured that every one pulls their weight
how, and in so far as to which, they are made by nature.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 5, 2011 at 2:47 am Link to this comment

In every society that breaks down into gangs and warlords, “Hoarding” becomes a crime, a death penalty crime.  How dare you keep food from marauding bands of “soldiers”?  We are seeing this right now in Somalia, where food distributions are immediately seized by the gangs as soon as the cameras are turned off, and the ordinary people starve so the human jackals can be fat and happy.

There are only two mediums of exchange: Money and guns.

You can either use an agreed-on medium of exchange, which is all money is, or you can use violence and steal from the less strong.  That’s it.

I’m not against wealth, especially earned wealth. I’m against illegally and immorally acquired wealth, because that’s not earned but stolen.

I don’t object to capitalism. I object to living in “Somalia” and calling that the “free market” and “unrestrained capitalism”.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 3, 2011 at 2:36 pm Link to this comment

crystaldemons, October 3 at 8:34 and 10:07 am - Don’t you know
some people want to take it with them to the grave? Are you trying
to generate the ire of the Blatta Republicans?  Now how are you going
to get legislation passed to do your very creative imaginary world?

Report this

By crystaldemons, October 3, 2011 at 9:07 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Money Hoarders !

If you were to compare the necessities of life, the actual needs a peson must have all the way from birth to retirement including old age, you would find that most multi-millionares would have more than surpassed that need manifold times…

Isn’t having so much money just deliberate hoarding !

A hoarder who see’s garbage as usefull(and some garbage is, but different point!) who see’s all garbage as usefull and an endless supply who doesn’t know when to stop goes over and above mani-fold times the common/average necessity in purpose of obtaining usefull garbage usually has an underlying mental condition that creates the compulsivity of their behavior, is this not true? It is also been said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions ! When a hoarder has to give something up, it is a painfull separation, evoking extreme anxiety, disgust resentment etc. even though as good as their intentions may have been aquiring it, they never can quite entrust people to make decisions for or on behalf of them separating from an item, so why would we not expect then a hoarder of money to act the same way? There are people who hoard just food or shoes too with the same disposition…

So just imagine Bill Gates from microsoft for example just because he is easier to remember, the microsoft empire, Gate’s empire ! Imagine for every $1.00 of self procalimed wealth beyond what is feasable to the common perspective of birth life and retirement to death and burial all his mundane purposeful costs, not extraordinary. Imagine every $1.00 beyond life sustaining is a loaf of bread that has gone stale and has mold and in inedible?

So for each dollar that Gates doesn’t circulate back into the economy turns into a loaf of moldy stale bread. He’s held on to the same wealth over and above his own basic necessities for so long that even his own money depreciates. Just like a hoard holds onto trash that is literally trash, it turns to rot !

And a food hoarder winds up poisoning his/herself or family with outdated food. Trust me I know, my uncle is a food hoarder!

My point is there is so much stagnant money that is not moving around, and just because people come off intelligent or smart and have degrees we praise smarts and intelligence and reward them with the confidence that it is o.k. to make fortunes out of their guru senses but we forget to pop that ego ballon sometimes or knock people off of pedestals when they get too big or too high, because when they do, they get downright condecending because they know you are not as fortunate to achieve a status such as they have. You can get all the equal treament and smarts such as a person as Gates, but the Deals are done, paths are sealed, Doors are closed, contracts are signed, The end, and empire has risen! Realistically, try to overthrow the microsoft empire! Trying to overthrow just causes competition and another big bad money hoarder, more loaves of moldy stale bread and society left nibbling at the crumbs. We’ll save a miniscule amount of money on our next computer purchase from a competetor and a lifetime of discontent because the people at the top want an empire from our consumerism !

Money hoarders, multi-millionare and billionares alike have gutted our abilities to maintain composure and I don’t see the few coming forward to save the many, at what cost would it be to the world, if the top 100 wealthiest people in America handed over their entire fortune to the Government to save over 300 million people from the fringes of collapse?

We have no quarrel about sending soldiers to foriegn land to defend other more mundane potential collapses in ethics and morals or protecting the soil, so why not take the wealthiest in this financial war and turn them into soldiers of a different kind! If we have the capabilities to institute the draft for war purposes, then why can’t we do this for the purpose of the economy ? aren’t we in an act of war ?

Report this

By crystaldemons, October 3, 2011 at 7:35 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What if the Government imposed a wealth/assets cap of 5 million dollars per person and no one could hold more than 5 million dollars at any one time for any purpose what so ever? Would’nt that change dramatically the distribution of wealth? Penalize those by 15% up to the 5 mil each time the make over 5 mil and sieze the rest or force them to make a beneficiary for additional monies. 

Homes and other special materialistic dreams like yachts and jets and land that are over 5 million in costs will be dramatically reduced and made affordable. Shareholders would be prevented from partially owning or becoming conglomerates because a single transaction more than 5 mil would be unlawfull for one person to acquire.

A 100 million dollar company for example would have to have 20 shareholders minimum and the number of shareholders would exponentaily rise proportionatly as it amasses wealth , for every 5 mil there must be a shareholder interest and seat at the table. This would greatly enforce the actual needs of humanity and actualize true demand and necessity striking a genuine purpose to the workforce. You would see more frugality in industry manufacturing less junk and poor quality items this country would become less generic and go to the heart of purpose and need rather than instant gratification. You would have more foriegn investors sitting at our table investing in us because they would also be capped as an investor. So if a corporation or company were to fail there is no large losses due to just a handfull of individuals, accountability would be more widespread, the risk of investment would be low.
Families and friends could aquire excess wealth from an individual with the same cap 5 mil per individual creating better generational/familial outcomes like a living legacy.
This could normalize exacerbated systems of wealth in this country for decades. More money dumped into the mainstream via a 5 mil cap. would allow more money open for taxation which could provide the needy and compensate for those who have been at the other end of the stick for so long gradually pulling the stick out of the mud.

You can have a choice with your 5 mil , participate in ongoing business, spending some money and making some money and paying taxes at 10% a year with your 5 mil and giving some away in the process to bring other people to fruition or call it quits and retire with 5 mil and if you choose to retire your tax is only 1 % a year !   
If a beneficiary is incapable of managing their funds due to health , physical or mental, facilitate a power of attorney or institution that manages the wellbeing of that person and their best interests.
There is no need for fluxuating exhuberant cost these days, people waiting on grants and funding like a lottery if they don’t have the right combination of needs like the numbers in a lottery then they can’t win. Waiting for state aid , medical care, disability, retirement and are scrutined by people who have a checklist and not a heart nor sympathy or compassion for individuality but for conformity, which ironically conformity is staring back at at them harder than ever. If the weak and poverish must conform to make dues in this life, then so shall the strong. If I can make someones life better without quarrel and just cause then so can those sitting at the top without quarrel.

Life is about doing things for the common good of all, not out of hatred, spite, animosity, jealousy etc. But with a song of purpose in our heart, we all know that song, we all strive for greatness and wonderfull things but we have grown so ignorant because we have been stripped of our decency and grace we have been stabbed in our hearts and betrayed by greedy individuals, systems and institutions and corporations aswell as government entities.
A 5 mil cap can work if it is forced into existence, But right now people can make a diffence sharing the wealth and putting themselves at disposal, pay it forward !

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 30, 2011 at 7:54 am Link to this comment

Anti-trust legislation???  Oh…yeah!  F’sure f’sure.  Dredging that
old sock, market restraint Anti-trust, or anti-monopoly legislation,
went out of style a decade ago.  I think Sherman died and was buried
in the Corporatocratic Bush years.  You are right, that would do the
trick, if tricks are what is needed.  But anti-trust legislation has about
as much of a chance as a rat’s ass not getting caught in a trap of
velveeta cheese of getting passed as much as a jobs bill that would
create enough jobs to lower the unemployment rate even 1% has.  We
be doomed unless americanus blatta republicanuses are defeated in
every election possible to provide a liberal Congress that will support
the President’s save-the-collective-asses-of-the-people plans.

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, September 30, 2011 at 6:50 am Link to this comment

Leefeller’s right:
Corporations don’t die.
But they can be broken.

That’s what we need to do with the too-big-to-fails—break them up.
Using Anti-Trust legislation, not punitively, but to create more competition between them.

As for political contributions, corporations can’t vote so they should be prohibited from contributing to the political process.

I say let natural persons who are legal citizens contribute all they want (Soros and Koch Brothers alike) but with full transparency.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 30, 2011 at 5:41 am Link to this comment

I find the posts attacking Buffet disgustingly close minded, almost Tea Baggish in nature.

Never ending hypocrisy sponsored by the right and their shamelessness is astounding and absurd at the same time!

This comment by Dionne says a lot:

“Militant conservatives are effective because they are absolutely shameless. Many of the same people who think the rich should be free to spend unlimited sums influencing our politics without having to disclose anything are now asking Buffett to make his tax returns public.”

Look at the Republicans answer to Elizabeth Warrens comments, 10 million dollars to her 900 hundred thousand. Those attacking Buffet for his wealth here on posts seem just as disgusting and shameless as those of wealth who attack the poor for their poorness!

Now that corporations are people too, the shamelessness is rampart. The Republicans support the idea, Romney has even said it…. “Corporations are people”  Well Ass Holes, ....I will believe and accept ‘corporations are people too, when Texas executes one!’

Report this
mrfreeze's avatar

By mrfreeze, September 29, 2011 at 2:47 pm Link to this comment

David451 - I found your comment to be interesting and right on target.

In the end, Americans are looking for “the answer” to our economic & political problems in the hope that, like so many hour-long dramas on TV, everything will be OK in the end. Unfortunately, it’s a fool’s aspiration. No salvation will be found through the wealthy, through government or via our fellow Americans.

I believe America has reached the expiration date of its #1 status in the world and, as all empires do, it will fade away. After all, what more can the U.S. offer the world other than military exports?

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, September 29, 2011 at 2:15 pm Link to this comment

Buffet’s tax rate just got a whole lot lower. 
He lost $6B last year (2010). 
This still leaves him #2 behind Gates as wealthiest American.

You don’t hear the whole truth from either the Left or Right on taxes:
The Right complains that the 49% of households pay no income taxes.  “They ought to have some skin in the game,” they complain.  But the poor/middle class pay their share in payroll and sales taxes.

The Left is just as disingenuous.
They ignore the disparity of income tax revenues; the top 10% of earners paying 70% of the whole.
They’d rather whine about effective tax rates on wages vs. capital gains rates. 
As if there were no distinction between the two. 
No surprise that risk of capital is a concept foreign to so-called Liberal/Progressives. 
But then they shouldn’t wonder why those with cash are afraid to invest or hire.

The more I read, the more I like Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 tax plan. 
It’s elegant, and simplicity creates stability.  That breeds confidence.
It’s also transparent.  I believe much of the resentment over taxes comes from the complexity of the model. 
Rich, poor and middle-class alike feel they’re getting snookered. 

Most importantly, it removes taxes upon labor (payroll taxes)in favor of a tax on consumption.  Much more fundamentally sound.
Taxes should be paid at the end of the production cycle rather than the beginning.

Report this
Robespierre115's avatar

By Robespierre115, September 29, 2011 at 1:40 pm Link to this comment

People like Buffett prefer a hiked tax than real, democratic reforms that would break their hold on the system and economy. I’m pretty sure a few oligarchs told Louis XVI, the Tsar, the Shah to do some cosmetic changes so those evil peasants with the pitchforks could go back home with smiles.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, September 29, 2011 at 12:24 pm Link to this comment

This might be Dionne’s article but it is not about Dionne. 
The latest scum tactic of the americanus blatta republicanus
is to express ultra pride in their wealth and sing the siren’s song
that it is wrong to begrudge them their wealth.  Oh yeah.  This is
in vehement diametric opposition to the Obama promise to tax
the wealthy a more equitable rate. Letting the Bush tax cuts sunset
is a major course of action that will correct the mistake of what
has been a completely ineffective plan to encourage the rich to
invest their wealth in the US economy promoting job creation in
manufacturing and other producers of economic stabilizers, wealth
made either by letting their money burgeon exponentially in interest
bearing funds or on the sweat and tears and backs of the way
underpaid.  Tax reform will be a second principle way. But both
of these repairing measures will be resisted by the corporatocratic
Republicans and we all know why. Joe Scarborough of MSNBC Morning
Joe and a recent as a Politico columnist is fit to be tied and smooching
up to his conservative body politic screaming on a daily basis his
opinion that the plan to increase taxes on the rich will not do anything. 
He argues as the conservative that he is, just like Obama whacker
Mitch McConnell, that if the rich want to pay more taxes, nobody’s
stopping them from paying more taxes.  Not quite true.

Republicans would have the US borrow 700 billion dollars over the next
10 years to give a tax cut to each of a 100,000 tax breaks to those who
are already millionaires.  I agree with Obama that the middle class tax
cuts should not beheld hostage one minute longer by the Roach
Republicans.  Tax rates should go back to what they were under Clinton. 

The government is able to legislate tax breaks to everyone making
250,000 or less, which is 97-98% of the American population as well
as his proposed tax breaks to new businesses. Obama’s plan proposed
savings over the next ten years that includes $1.5 trillion in tax
increases, primarily on the wealthy, from a combination of closing tax
loopholes and limiting the amount that high earners can deduct.  It
would also include just over $1 trillion in war savings, coming from the
ending of the combat mission in Iraq and the withdrawal of U.S. troops
from Afghanistan.  $580 billion would be cut from mandatory spending,
which includes approximately $250 billion from Medicare and $800
billion from Medicaid. Obama says the Medicare cuts will not come
from raising the retirement age, but it would include means testing.

Bush did not pass his tax cut through regular means but used the
conciliation process.  They were not intended to be permanent.  The
Republicans now want to make these permanent or… higher taxes
for everyone, but Obama says no, only those who make a quarter of
a million dollars of taxable income and up.  25 hedge fund multimillion
dollar income managers made a billion dollars last year paid a tax rate
of ZERO and only pay taxes when they cash out which could be decades
down the road. 

Without a shred of evidence, Republicans argue tax cuts would
stimulate the jobs market. In the last 10 Bush years there is no
sign that this is a reality.  Obama has had a Sisyphus uphill climb
only to be torn from black limb to black limb by racist Republican
vultures more interested in eating him alive than they are in saving
the hides of economically hurting Americans.

What would most stimulate the economy is to increase demand for
more customers to buy services and products. Investors are sitting
on 1.8 trillion dollars of cash, that is 6,000 dollars cash for each
person in this country. Unemployment produces no buyers, the only
fix is to create more jobs and since the private sector won’t do it,
then government has to.

Report this
david451's avatar

By david451, September 29, 2011 at 10:53 am Link to this comment

Beyond the obscene piles of money, the issue for the elites is really about a return to the “natural order of things”, where wealth is the mechanism that distinguishes the few from the many, and which then maintains that separation. From Plato to Alexander Hamilton to the conservative thinkers of today, rule by
the elite remains, in their view, the natural order—money and power in the service of money and power.

“All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and the well born, the others the mass of the people…The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge and determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share of government. They will check the
unsteadiness of the second.” Alexander Hamilton, first Treasury Secretary of the U.S.

Viewed in this context, the elites consider liberal democracy and the New Deal to be the aberrations of history, not the norm.  And since the term “democracy” does not even appear in the US Constitution, it is the views of Limbaugh, Phillips, Williams and Buchanan that truly animate the them. The monied class has chafed at what they view to be the unnatural imbalance created by FDR, and is poised to reclaim its natural right. And this brings us to Warren Buffett and his so-called betrayal of the rich few.

Buffett has a shone light where darkness prevails.  He has opened a dialogue on a forbidden subject.  But the tax issue is a misdirection. True, the rich believe in meritocracy, and have managed to shed the burdens of the social contract (the rich will always find ways to shed the burden of the social contract). The real prize, however, is the power that their money has secured, a return to the natural order of things, and their self-proclaimed right to a permanent share of government.

Public dissent and public action are the only tools left to restore what might nominally be called democracy. The recent XL Pipeline protests and the Wall Street action are a good start, but only a start.

For more go to: .

Report this

By clarence swinney, September 29, 2011 at 10:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Our 5% own 62% net wealth
Your 80% or 112,000,00 lazy loons own 15%  and we want it We deserve it.
Our 20% own 93% of financial wealth
Your 80% or 112,000,000 inept goof offs own 7% and we want it. All of it.
Our 25% take 67% of all individual Income
Your 50% of 70,000,000 undeserving take 13% and we want it. We earned it. It is ours.

You are calling Jesus? Ha Ha Ha.
That brown skinned lover of the poor cannot harm us.
You are calling Congress?
Ho Ho Big Joke. We own them. Have you never noticed big $$$$$$$$$  BUYS ANYONE?
You are calling “our” White House. We own it. We started in 1980 with good old Ron then good old Busheloon capped it off and now we own it 100%. Ours! You dummy.
You will go to the press? Wow! Are you out of the loop. We own it. All.

We are now in control we are now known as
viva la $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
clarenceswinney madmadmad at Inequality in America
political historian lifeaholics of america   .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Report this
Rigor's avatar

By Rigor, September 29, 2011 at 10:16 am Link to this comment

“They” dislike Buffet because he has no skin in the game. His fortunes were made a long time ago and has nothing to loose. Sure he could pay out a few extra million in taxes and not blink, but will he? Oh Hell No! One of his “ventures” owes back taxes still, but no word about that, yet.
Tax the living poop out of the million/billion-aires and I couldn’t care less, but if the motive is redistribution of wealth I’d stand with the fatcats to stop it.
A national flat tax is the only fair solution. Now I know why the repub. elite don’t want this, but why won’t some liberal elite, like Buffet or Moore, come out to support it? Why isn’t Barry The Liar pushing for this instead of devising more multi-billion dollar spending spree’s? It’s because they are rich fat cats too, that want all the money they can grab - just as fat cats do.
Hopefully the citizenry will come to realize that there are only elites and the rest of us. Sure some are liberal & some are conservative, but poverty knows no politics.

Report this
miroslav's avatar

By miroslav, September 29, 2011 at 6:29 am Link to this comment

No doubt the “Sage of Omaha” is smart! What do
you do if you see the pack coming to rob you
blind! You approach them, offering them a share
of your loot! And the suckers fall for it again!
That the poor poor millionaires and all the
idiots who think they can make it on their own
hate him goes nearly without admitting their
infinite stupidity.

Report this

By BBFmail, September 29, 2011 at 5:26 am Link to this comment


The President says that those who defend this situation “ought to have to answer for it.”  Fair enough.  Short answer: Warren Buffet is lying.  Much longer answer: 10 points.

  * Most simply, Warren Buffett is almost definitely lying about the tax rate of his secretary.  Now, it’s possible to pay any tax rate if you really want to, by paying more than is required.  You can just send in a check.  Since Warren apparently refuses to do that, let us dismiss that option for his secretary.  The typical person making between 50-75k, according to this IRS tax data, pays an effective rate of about 14%.  14% is less than 30%.  Even adding on payroll tax, it’s nowhere near 30%.  CBO data, including payroll taxes, shows that someone making about $64,000 per year pays a total effective rate of around 14.3%.  We asked an accountant to run the numbers in general for someone like Buffett’s secretary.  The results: if they were single, 14%.  If married, 7.6%.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 29, 2011 at 2:54 am Link to this comment

When I read a comment like Robespierre’s I wonder if he read the same article I did?  If he understands that Buffett is far different than the Koch Brothers?
The Kochs are leading generals in Class Warfare for the rich and always have been.

And if you read Reeve’s companion article you’ll notice that corporate taxation since WWII has gone from $1.50 per personal tax dollar to $.25/personal tax dollar and the tax burden has shifted heavily.

It’s not about “worship”. It’s about not going unarmed into this class warfare, a war that if it’s not solved in the halls of Congress, will be fought on the streets.

Me? I’d MUCH rather see Congress create a more fair tax code than have a civil war as more and more services get cut that are critical.  We’ve seen what that does in other nations.  Currently, rather than tax the rich, the Re-Thugs are happy to cut pre-natal and post-natal care (for all those “innocent unborn” they say they are keen on protecting), Head Start, and every other social welfare program. 

And, of course, like jackals smelling a dead animal, they are being driven mad with hunger at the thought of getting the hundreds of billions in Social Security into the Wall Street investment houses, like they did so well with mortgages.

Yes, we are in a class war.  And Buffett is a turn-coat from the other side.  I don’t condemn him for it, or for being rich.  If the Kochs can use their wealth to buy the TeaParty and Congress, which has so badly skewed and damaged the nation, why can’t Buffett use it for the opposite?

Report this

By LA_CC, September 29, 2011 at 12:18 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

@Robespierre115 - I don’t think Buffet will change
his tune. He’s already got his bank.

This talk about ‘punishment’ cracks me up.Are we
‘punishing’ labor and wages and hard work even more
than fat-cat investments? um… yep. Why does no one
point that out?

Report this

By Miko, September 28, 2011 at 9:51 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why is Buffett willing to pay a few million more in
taxes?  Well gee, he’s made billions (literally:
billions with a “b”) profiteering from the
“stimulus,” in what would be called insider trading
if he’d done it with another CEO instead of with
Obama and his entire company is built on the
principle of leveraging tax laws in order to create
fake profits (by buying stock in dividend-giving
companies and re-bundling them in a corporation that
doesn’t give dividends but instead “reinvests” them
inside the company).

Like most billionaires, Buffett is now little more
than a criminal.  Like most billionaires, he only
gets away with it because he has politicians in his
pocket.  You can certainly accuse Buffett of “class
warfare” and, as he frankly admits, his class (and he
himself) is winning.  He’s willing to help Obama take
a few million from him only because he knows that
Obama will keep giving him billions in return.

Report this
Robespierre115's avatar

By Robespierre115, September 28, 2011 at 8:34 pm Link to this comment

The right-wing are fools but “liberals” like Dionne are also idiots for desperately trying to find a rich person they can worship. Of course an oligarch like Buffett calls for raised taxes, people like him already own the country, they don’t care about paying a little more. But when the working class revolts, then expect different songs coming out of the mouths of this scum.

Report this
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Like Truthdig on Facebook